California OAH special education order · September 15, 2021
Order Denying Motion to Compel
OAH Case No. 2021080419 · ALJ June Lehrman
OAH denied Student's motion to compel Los Angeles to provide stay put behavior services because the parties' factual dispute cannot be resolved by motion and OAH lacks jurisdiction to enforce its own orders.
Summary
OAH had earlier ordered Los Angeles to implement Student's February 10, 2021 IEP as stay put, including 1,950 minutes a week of one-to-one behavior intervention implementation. Student moved to compel Los Angeles to provide proof that the services were being delivered and to hold a hearing on why they had not been provided. Los Angeles opposed and submitted declarations saying the services were being provided. OAH denied the motion because the factual dispute could not be resolved through motion practice, and because under Wyner OAH has no jurisdiction to enforce its own orders, including stay put orders.
Why it matters
Winning a stay put order at OAH does not give families a way to enforce it at OAH. If a district does not implement stay put, parents need another route, such as a state compliance complaint with the California Department of Education or an action in court.
Key authority cited
- Wyner ex rel. Wyner v. Manhattan Beach Unified Sch. Dist., 223 F.3d 1026 (9th Cir. 2000)
Topics
Full text of the order
Published text of the OAH order. Page headers and numbers from the original PDF have been dropped.
BEFORE THE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE MATTER OF:
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
v.
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2021080419
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL
SEPTEMBER 15, 2021
On August 24, 2021, the Office of Administrative Hearings issued an Order granting stay put, specifically ordering Los Angeles to implement Student’s last agreed upon and implemented February 10, 2021 IEP, which in relevant part included behavioral services in the form of one-to-one behavior intervention implementation for 1950 minutes a week. The Office of Administrative Hearings is called OAH.
On September 9, 2021, Student filed a Motion to Compel, seeking an order from OAH “compelling [Los Angeles] to provide [Student] with the behavior intervention implementation as ordered.” More specifically Student asked OAH to “order [Los Angeles] to provide proof of implementation of the BII services by September 11, 2021 and order a hearing for the District by September 15, 2021 to show cause why the services have not been provided.” Student submitted declarations to the effect that the services have not been provided.
On September 14, 2021, Los Angeles opposed, contending that the services have indeed been provided, and submitting declarations and documents attempting to establish that as fact.
The factual dispute between the parties cannot be resolved via motion practice.
Moreover, OAH lacks jurisdiction to enforce its own orders. (See Wyner ex rel. Wyner v.
Manhattan Beach Unified Sch. Dist., 223 F.3d 1026, 1030 (9th Cir. 2000) (Wyner). Wyner held that the special education hearing office does not have jurisdiction to enforce their own final hearing decisions. Student contends that Wyner does not apply here, because “a stay put order is not the final hearing decision.” The argument is unconvincing.
Wyner stands for the general proposition that OAH is not the avenue by which to seek enforcement of its orders. Other than distinguishing Wyner on these facts, Student cites no affirmative authority that OAH’s jurisdiction extends to the requested relief. For these reasons, the Motion is therefore denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
June Lehrman Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings